Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.
| Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co. | |
|---|---|
| Decided May 24, 2010 | |
| Full case name | Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co. |
| Citations | 560 U.S. 242 (more) |
| Holding | |
| A fee claimant need not be a "prevailing party" to be eligible for an attorney's fees award under ERISA. Only some degree of success on the merits is required. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor; Stevens (Parts I & II) |
| Concurrence | Stevens (in part) |
| Laws applied | |
| Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 | |
Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co., 560 U.S. 242 (2010), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a fee claimant need not be a "prevailing party" to be eligible for an attorney's fees award under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Only some degree of success on the merits is required.